FRP's choice of plays is a freedom issue

James WardBe Our Guest

Published: Thursday, December 27, 2012 at 4:30 a.m.

Last Modified: Wednesday, December 26, 2012 at 12:32 p.m.

In a recent Times-News article, Henderson County Commissioner Larry Young is quoted as saying the Flat Rock Playhouse is “going to produce plays that the public around here can support, with no foul language or sex or anything like that. So we got that solved, too.”

Facts

Ward is a retired professor who resides in Hendersonville.

In a Times-News guest column, Robert Danos, former chairman of the Henderson County Republican Party, refers to those who say there has been “too much rough language in some shows in the past few years” and says, “The current leadership team has received that message clearly, and I can tell you that the 2013 season doesn’t contain a single show I wouldn’t watch with my own mother.”

These gentlemen obviously don’t see the irony in their statements. The Republican party in general and local Republicans in particular are hysterically vocal in their opposition to what they consider to be government control of any aspect of citizens’ lives. However, both of these gentlemen see nothing wrong with censoring the productions of the Flat Rock Playhouse and dictating the type of plays that are performed there.

This is from members of the party that decries government regulations of any kind and that invokes the Second Amendment with a howl whenever anyone suggests there should be some restrictions on the purchase of guns in a country in which more gun deaths per 100,000 population occur each year than in any other advanced industrialized nation on Earth, and four times as many as in the next 22 high-income countries combined in 2003, according to the World Health Organization (Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery, January 2011).

Those who would censor Playhouse productions can’t have it both ways. The question of what type of plays the Playhouse performs is a matter of freedom, the same freedom that Republicans routinely bray so loudly about. The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the one before their hallowed Second, guarantees freedom of speech. That freedom includes the right to perform plays some people might find offensive. Those who do not want to attend theatrical performances that contain “sex” or “foul language” can choose not to do so.

There are those who do choose to see such performances. They understand and appreciate that the world’s greatest dramatic works, including those by the great Greek and Roman playwrights, Shakespeare and the Elizabethans, the authors of English Restoration comedy, and the writers of classic 20th-century American plays, hold a mirror up to nature and reflect on stage the realities of the world in which we live, no matter how absurd, harsh or ugly those realities happen to be. Anyone who doesn’t want to see these realities depicted on the stage can choose not to see them.

In Mr. Danos’ column, the movies “The Godfather” and “Braveheart” are cited as being acceptable, but the plays “Art,” “A Few Good Men” and “Red” are labeled offensive. In other words, cinematic depictions of war, violence, bloodshed, mayhem and murder are OK, but a little sex or “rough” language on stage is not. That logic, or lack thereof, reflects the same mentality that is offended by Michelangelo’s David and the Sistine Chapel ceiling.

Playhouse censors apparently don’t see the similarity between this mentality and that of dictatorial regimes like the Taliban and Stalinist Russia. It is interesting that our local controversy has occurred at a time when a Russian art exhibit, banned for 50 years (since the Khrushchev era), is being seen in Russia for the first time. Considering these two events, it appears that Russia is making progress in the realm of freedom while Hendersonville is regressing rapidly in that regard.

The American Library Association regularly publishes a list of books that have been banned or challenged in the U.S. For the 2000-2009 10-year period, the following titles were among the top 100 books on that list: the “Harry Potter” books, “Of Mice and Men,” “Huckleberry Finn,” “To Kill a Mockingbird,” “Slaughterhouse Five,” “Fahrenheit 451,” “I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings,” “One Flew over the Cuckoo’s Nest,” “In the Night Kitchen” and “Are You There God? It’s Me, Margaret.” The repressive mentality that seeks to ban these books rivals that of the Soviet era and of today’s Iran and North Korea, which bans the Christian Bible. This mentality, just as that depicted in Orwell’s “1984,” says, “You’ll do things my way or no way at all. I’ll decide what you can and can’t say, see, hear or do.”

Those who would censor Flat Rock Playhouse productions do not represent the views of everyone in the Hendersonville area, and the would-be censors do not have the right to dictate the artistic standards of this community. Flat Rock Playhouse has the constitutional right, indeed the duty, to perform the best works of world drama, regardless of their content and regardless of whether they are offensive to some individuals.

As for Playhouse productions suitable for watching with one’s mother, I would have taken my mother to see any of the three plays mentioned as being so offensive, and she would have understood and appreciated them for what they are: attempts in a free country to address in dramatic form the conflicts and struggles that are part of the human condition.

<p>In a recent Times-News article, Henderson County Commissioner Larry Young is quoted as saying the Flat Rock Playhouse is “going to produce plays that the public around here can support, with no foul language or sex or anything like that. So we got that solved, too.”</p><p>In a Times-News guest column, Robert Danos, former chairman of the Henderson County Republican Party, refers to those who say there has been “too much rough language in some shows in the past few years” and says, “The current leadership team has received that message clearly, and I can tell you that the 2013 season doesn't contain a single show I wouldn't watch with my own mother.”</p><p>These gentlemen obviously don't see the irony in their statements. The Republican party in general and local Republicans in particular are hysterically vocal in their opposition to what they consider to be government control of any aspect of citizens' lives. However, both of these gentlemen see nothing wrong with censoring the productions of the Flat Rock Playhouse and dictating the type of plays that are performed there.</p><p>This is from members of the party that decries government regulations of any kind and that invokes the Second Amendment with a howl whenever anyone suggests there should be some restrictions on the purchase of guns in a country in which more gun deaths per 100,000 population occur each year than in any other advanced industrialized nation on Earth, and four times as many as in the next 22 high-income countries combined in 2003, according to the World Health Organization (Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery, January 2011).</p><p>Those who would censor Playhouse productions can't have it both ways. The question of what type of plays the Playhouse performs is a matter of freedom, the same freedom that Republicans routinely bray so loudly about. The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the one before their hallowed Second, guarantees freedom of speech. That freedom includes the right to perform plays some people might find offensive. Those who do not want to attend theatrical performances that contain “sex” or “foul language” can choose not to do so.</p><p>There are those who do choose to see such performances. They understand and appreciate that the world's greatest dramatic works, including those by the great Greek and Roman playwrights, Shakespeare and the Elizabethans, the authors of English Restoration comedy, and the writers of classic 20th-century American plays, hold a mirror up to nature and reflect on stage the realities of the world in which we live, no matter how absurd, harsh or ugly those realities happen to be. Anyone who doesn't want to see these realities depicted on the stage can choose not to see them.</p><p>In Mr. Danos' column, the movies “The Godfather” and “Braveheart” are cited as being acceptable, but the plays “Art,” “A Few Good Men” and “Red” are labeled offensive. In other words, cinematic depictions of war, violence, bloodshed, mayhem and murder are OK, but a little sex or “rough” language on stage is not. That logic, or lack thereof, reflects the same mentality that is offended by Michelangelo's David and the Sistine Chapel ceiling.</p><p>Playhouse censors apparently don't see the similarity between this mentality and that of dictatorial regimes like the Taliban and Stalinist Russia. It is interesting that our local controversy has occurred at a time when a Russian art exhibit, banned for 50 years (since the Khrushchev era), is being seen in Russia for the first time. Considering these two events, it appears that Russia is making progress in the realm of freedom while Hendersonville is regressing rapidly in that regard.</p><p>The American Library Association regularly publishes a list of books that have been banned or challenged in the U.S. For the 2000-2009 10-year period, the following titles were among the top 100 books on that list: the “Harry Potter” books, “Of Mice and Men,” “Huckleberry Finn,” “To Kill a Mockingbird,” “Slaughterhouse Five,” “Fahrenheit 451,” “I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings,” “One Flew over the Cuckoo's Nest,” “In the Night Kitchen” and “Are You There God? It's Me, Margaret.” The repressive mentality that seeks to ban these books rivals that of the Soviet era and of today's Iran and North Korea, which bans the Christian Bible. This mentality, just as that depicted in Orwell's “1984,” says, “You'll do things my way or no way at all. I'll decide what you can and can't say, see, hear or do.”</p><p>Those who would censor Flat Rock Playhouse productions do not represent the views of everyone in the Hendersonville area, and the would-be censors do not have the right to dictate the artistic standards of this community. Flat Rock Playhouse has the constitutional right, indeed the duty, to perform the best works of world drama, regardless of their content and regardless of whether they are offensive to some individuals.</p><p>As for Playhouse productions suitable for watching with one's mother, I would have taken my mother to see any of the three plays mentioned as being so offensive, and she would have understood and appreciated them for what they are: attempts in a free country to address in dramatic form the conflicts and struggles that are part of the human condition.</p>